Wednesday, June 3, 2009

An Important HR Dilemma

The very first principle of HR that I was exposed to in my junior year at the university when I decided to major in human resources has been with me for over 47 years. I have never forgotten it. It has always accompanied me when pondering or deliberating HR policy choices. Good HR decisions must meet the test of consistency, fairness and competitiveness.

So here is one dilemma.

Is it more important to be consistent rather than fair? Or, is it more important to be fair even though you cannot be consistent?

What are the consequences of chosing one over the other, if you have to?

I speculate that most line managers, especially those trained in the physical sciences, will tend to choose consistency over fairness. To them, consistency rules. Others, especially those trained in social sciences, might go in the other direction. I think that I am one of them. Why?

We say and believe that no two human beings are alike. We do know that people differ in their needs. We all accept that. But for one reason or another, possibly administrative expediency, we have adopted policies over the years that ignore individual differences and try to fit everyone in the same box. The famous Dilbert cartoon series has made its author rich. His cartoons often depict the evil HR Director in less than positive light. An artistic distortion? Perhaps!

One pay system for everyone, a travel policy by job role, the same benefits for everyone. There are exceptions, of course. We have special pay schemes for sales people. We have cafeteria plans that permit employees to configure their own benefit plan. We have flexible hours to accommodate family needs. And so on. But when it comes to issues of employee relations, we often try to solve an individual problem with a common solution. One size fits all?

I advance the unorthodox notion that fairness should trump consistency in employee relations matters. Fairness originates in our heart, in our emotional side, it is part of our soul, while consistency comes from our rational side. This side has no feelings. It operates like a machine without a soul. What good does it do us if our actions are perceived to be unfair but consistent? What deficits do we accrue if we choose to be fair but not necessarily consistent? Are all situations the same? Does the same medicine cure all ills? Is the world black and white or are there shades of grey?

I welcome your thoughts on this subject.

No comments:

Post a Comment